tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post238652148245999054..comments2016-07-21T09:07:00.859-04:00Comments on Advanced Football Analytics (formerly Advanced NFL Stats): Run-Pass Balance--A Historical AnalysisBrian Burkenoreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-90690997190071417252015-11-27T12:18:37.481-05:002015-11-27T12:18:37.481-05:00&quot;I think your graphs should read left to righ...&quot;I think your graphs should read left to right.&quot;<br /><br />Amen.Daniel Bhttp://wolff.to/area/title.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-90040189141308537582015-06-13T14:31:48.913-04:002015-06-13T14:31:48.913-04:00Its funny to read these &quot;educated&quot; posts...Its funny to read these &quot;educated&quot; posts from some guy in Germany about the dominance of the passing game. The Seahawks 2013, 2014 and soon their 2015 SB runs will continue to prove the value of a strong running game, and using that valuable cap space to prop up a defense to stunt the opposition.<br /><br />Anyone who saw Manning and the Brocos lose a 5 TD lead at half time to the Patriots in 2013 knows the value of a running game ISN&#39;T just the ability to move the line of scrimmage... it&#39;s also the ability to eat the clock once you get the lead.<br /><br />Any team who can eat clock when they&#39;re ahead, is a team the opponent can&#39;t catch up to. The run game is strongest when paired with a strong defense, as it makes the both teams possessions count drop (less actual game time) and keeps the defense fresher than a big-gunning passing competition when corner backs and safeties get gassed by the 3rd quarter.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-48296324418315718102014-02-04T15:10:14.574-05:002014-02-04T15:10:14.574-05:00I think your graphs should read left to right.I think your graphs should read left to right.JulianAccornerohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05388942752216005983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-49569587436490467642014-01-13T04:10:35.373-05:002014-01-13T04:10:35.373-05:00Is this a good summary? : Passing efficiency has ... Is this a good summary? : Passing efficiency has gone up more than running efficiency but teams are hardly passing more. Therefore their mix is suboptimal. <br /><br /> I don&#39;t see how the conclusion follows. It could be that teams were passing too much beforehand and now it is at a good level. UBKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-28855455867939785292012-09-07T00:26:21.985-04:002012-09-07T00:26:21.985-04:00&quot;With passing vs rushing though the gain is n...&quot;With passing vs rushing though the gain is nearly doubled, the negatives and possibility for turnover is also doubled.&quot;<br /><br />that ignores the likelihood that these events occur. I feel like passing is substantially more than twice as likely to result in a turnover as I can&#39;t help but figure a quarterback and receiver would generally have a higher fumble rate than a running back and that interception rates would be a lot higher than any of their fumble rates. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-62716404496638890792012-09-07T00:15:23.509-04:002012-09-07T00:15:23.509-04:00I don&#39;t think the NFL is stupid. I think that...I don&#39;t think the NFL is stupid. I think that the way the game is officiated makes it so that the only logical way a defense can slow down a good passing attack is getting the quarterback on the ground. I passed statistics but you probably know a lot more about the subject than I do but all you suggest is shifting focus to stopping passing attacks. Like how? Dropping 8 into coverage, exotic blit packages, more aggressive man coverage? <br /><br />I&#39;m more curious about the impact of an efficient run has on the opponents likelihood to successfully pressure a quarterback on the following play. I feel like the reason teams still run the ball at the clip they do is to prevent defensive lineman from shifting their entire focus on stopping the pass. <br /><br />Also, is there a correlation between the distance for a down being longer and the likelihood of the defense successfully generating pressure? while you may gain more yards in total on 1st and 10 passing, you&#39;ll still have missed attempts and I&#39;m curious how the odds of your quarterback getting knocked around change between a 2nd and 6 and a 2nd and 10<br /><br />I don&#39;t think the run sets up the pass anymore, but it very well may help to protect a team&#39;s most valuable asset Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-60557842107601641772012-08-20T15:09:28.660-04:002012-08-20T15:09:28.660-04:00There are too many variables to ever be able to de...There are too many variables to ever be able to definitely say that any level of offensive balance is optimized. But I can say that (to use Madden as a simulator) when you know your opponent is going to pass pratically all the time it is much easier to choose a defense, but unless you have a good pass rush the QB will always have the advantage. If you take the 2012 Super Bowl Giants as an example, their success on defense (specific to the last 2 games of the regualar season and the playoffs) was due to a combination of a consistent pass rush (without blitzing often) and being able to have a hybrid SS/LB on the field and not get crushed on running plays. <br />But the other issue is that even if you know exactly what the offense is going to do doesn&#39;t mean you can stop it, it only makes it more likely you will. But I agree with the idea of reaching a Nash equilibrium and not having both play types produce equal value. It is just the ratio that makes the avg play value for all plays the highest, which in today&#39;s NFL definitely favors the pass. But remember football is situtational not theoretical, if you have 3 and 2 maybe a pass would net the highest average gain, but a rush represents a highly likelihood fo getting a first down. Sometimes it doesn&#39;t make sense to get the most possible yards since you only have a limited number of attempts.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-48247948350524749562012-07-24T14:38:41.682-04:002012-07-24T14:38:41.682-04:00Teams continue to run because it eats up the clock...Teams continue to run because it eats up the clock. It&#39;s about ball and time control. With the ball in your hands and time ticking down who is statistically likely to score, offense or defense. If passing is so efficient then I need only go to it when the yards are needed. The negatives of rushing are fumble and loss of yards only. <br />the negatives of passing are interceptions, sacks (-gain), incomplete pass(clock stopping and 0yards), and fumbles. <br /><br />With passing vs rushing though the gain is nearly doubled, the negatives and possibility for turnover is also doubled. <br /><br />Naturally it would make sense for a defense to play the pass with twice the chance for turnovers in ones favor. <br /><br />BUT, how much is really gained if those negatives exist regardless of defensive scheme. The fact the offense is calling a pass play increases the defensive chance for turnover in their favor twofold all on its own. <br /><br />Now by defensively playing gap control and rushing schemes, it automatically limits the offenses rushing positives, and increases the pressure on QB&#39;s to make faster, quality, reads. Not to mention the lower need for depth and to field exceptionally skilled players in Defensive Back Positions. It is far easier to find and field a run-stopping or pass rushing LB/DL specialist than it is find a quality cover or Shutdown DB let alone fielding two or more for more pass oriented coverage.<br /><br />And as stated before if passing is so efficient one should only use it when needed because along with the degradation of efficiency with increased use there are twice as many negative outcomes which invariably have greater impact on the success of drives and scoring than the Yards Gained per Pass.<br /><br />So it is only natural for a defense to run blitzing or run stopping packages versus cover schemes. But thats just my argument as to why Defenses preferably focus on the run over pass.Vegaskingpinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-37174382334991848992012-02-11T12:38:04.691-05:002012-02-11T12:38:04.691-05:00Ian you are right. Coaching is done with the mind...Ian you are right. Coaching is done with the mind not stats. Stats can help explain things. But too much importance is placed on YPC, YPA, etc, etc. As you state there is the variance of outcome, and situation, and a host of other variables, that dictate the outcome of a play, drive, game and season. What you are saying is exactly what all DCs would say. I have to stop the run to rush the pass. That&#39;s the philosophy. And it&#39;s based on the variance outcome you explained. And one more, the variance of the Ds ability to reacte to the play coming at them. The higher % the chancce for a pass/run play exists the easier the play is to defend. In short if the D doesn&#39;t keep the run around 4 YPC they will always be guessing run or pass. And on another note it is only a matter of time before colleges and nfl start producing the # of quantity of CBs needed to defend the kind of offensive attacks we are seeing. Somewhere along the line as this trend continues and grows. SOme coach will say, you know everyone is trying to run these pass-prolific offenses. I&#39;m going to carve my nitch out by being the first one to focus on stopping them. See it only takes a Tony Dungy to stop a Bill Walsh, and stop current pass trends. The game has been back and forth. From the proto-WCO of Paul Brown, to the 4-3 of Laundry, to the WCO of Walsh, to the Buddy Ryans 46 D and it&#39;s 4-3 imitators, to the 2nd gen &quot;jumbo&quot; WCO&#39;s of Walsh&#39;s students. To Dungy&#39;s Tampa 2, which met Martz&#39; Greatest Show on Turf, which met Marvin Lewis&#39; multiple look D, and Dick Lebeau&#39;s zone blitz, and onto Belichick&#39;s pro spread offense. This has been the NFL for years. Somebody innovates and others immediately immitate. Then the other side adapts, and the process repeats itself. There is just not a dominant D answer to the current spread offenses. At some point more teams will figure out that over sized SS and under sized WILL LBs are the answer to man coverage on TEs like Grownkowski. SOme teams already have. But not many have them guys on their roster right now. But every offseason gives all the defensive minds months to pour over tape, and try to brain storm a new strategy. And as long as Ds continue to have little answer for what the offenses are doing, the offenses won&#39;t change much. And all it will take is one teams crew coming up with an answer and the trend begins to swing back.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-27500275141252609512011-12-02T13:19:50.940-05:002011-12-02T13:19:50.940-05:00There will forever be intangibles, because human b...There will forever be intangibles, because human beings play the game. Football intelligence, body type, athleticism, preparedness, and emotional state on a particular day/play - lots of things influence execution. I have not seen any references to what happens after a play is called and before it has ended. Generalized statistics include results by highly effective and highly ineffective players and coaches - all blended together into an homogenized puree. This data seems to assume that all players are equal. The best play callers and the best play makers seem to be those who are able to adapt most effectively to what the other team is doing and to outperform them in the field. Tendencies really should only be applied to the play calling of particular coaches and the trends in execution of particular players.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-17183595475950054542011-11-21T19:58:03.186-05:002011-11-21T19:58:03.186-05:00Numerically it makes sense to pass on every play s...Numerically it makes sense to pass on every play since you are at an advantage on all plays by spreading the field and limiting the amount of available blitzes the OL need to pick up.<br /><br />However this will likely result in smart defensive coordinators blitzing everyone in an attempt to remove the starting QB from the game. In fact this would be the most proficient way to play defense. Even if you give up a TD, injuring the QB by sending all 11 on the first pass play of the game would result in the opponent, particularly if the opponent has a star QB, scoring far fewer points than if yo played a conventional defense.<br /><br />If i were coaching a team with a limited QB, i would make it know that more than 20 passes per game will result likely in QB injury.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-59713226725385201402011-10-12T23:17:37.150-04:002011-10-12T23:17:37.150-04:00Really interesting post here...
Obviously the Mel...Really interesting post here...<br /><br />Obviously the Mel Blount rules changed the passing game forever. <br /><br />But there have been many small changes over the years that I think have led to offenses creating more points. People like points in general, few fans love a 3-0 game (I&#39;m one). <br /><br />However, not all rule changes are created equal. And some will have smaller steady impacts. For example the new rules regarding hitting defenseless receivers will probably lead to a few more caught passes and maybe even some more YAC when a tackle is missed that maý have killed the receiver before. <br /><br />And all these small changes correlate into increased passing prowess as time goes on.steelerfaninperuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12115960018974112996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-48970404408019991342011-05-08T15:19:08.177-04:002011-05-08T15:19:08.177-04:00Passing teams tend to be more successful because t...Passing teams tend to be more successful because the QB are in control.Mikehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08405376499233528568noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-12315120326767657712011-03-19T17:02:12.741-04:002011-03-19T17:02:12.741-04:00What also would be interesting to look at is if th...What also would be interesting to look at is if there&#39;s a major penalty differential in running vs. passing. For one, I imagine that, on average, there are more holding calls on pass plays. On the flip slide, do unnecessary roughness calls, pass interference, defensive holding calls account for any statistically significant benefit? This is just purely speculation, but isn&#39;t the general wisdom that NFL penalties are weighted to the pass game vs. run game?FourthandFortyTwohttp://fourthandfortytwo.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-73857763574587833862011-02-26T23:42:42.415-05:002011-02-26T23:42:42.415-05:00To highlight this point, consider that the teams g...To highlight this point, consider that the teams generally known as &quot;running teams&quot; generally have the most effective defenses.<br /><br />(The Chicago Bears in the 1980&#39;s, the New York Giants in the 1990&#39;s, the Baltimore Ravens in the early 2000&#39;s, and the Pittsburgh Steelers as examples)<br /><br />Simply put, a defense that is built to be on the field for a below-average number of possessions per game can be built around athletes who have more &quot;quick burst&quot; and power as opposed to more endurance athletes required by passing teams (white muscle fiber vs red muscle fiber).Grimmhttp://www.footballclub.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-58608496750115725072011-02-26T23:36:07.351-05:002011-02-26T23:36:07.351-05:00Running the ball has other advantages.
First, run...Running the ball has other advantages.<br /><br />First, running the ball effectively uses up the play clock, and generally &quot;shortens the game&quot; in terms of the total number of possessions during the game for each team.<br /><br />A great example of this is where the New York Giants, chiefly a running team, defeated the Buffalo Bills, an aerial power, in Super Bowl XXV.<br /><br />Another important point to make is that shortening the game by running the clock down also gives the defense a chance to rest while the offense is on the field. <br /><br />Conversely, in this scenario, the opposing defense is not allowed a chance to rest, and is worn down by the running team&#39;s offensive line.Grimmhttp://www.footballclub.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-9413354279260273112011-02-22T15:34:59.083-05:002011-02-22T15:34:59.083-05:00The numbers in aggregate are interesting, but not ...The numbers in aggregate are interesting, but not revelatory. Increasing short-yardage running situations will bring down the average yards per rushing attempt, but does not speak about the success of a running play. Yes, not every &quot;running down&quot; will include a run, but I imagine that runs face a steeper yardage penalty than a pass in those situations. <br /><br />A more honest evaluation here is the expected YPC/YPA on 1st and 10, or an analysis of short-yardage running plays.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-61355899494237276202010-12-03T15:40:25.503-05:002010-12-03T15:40:25.503-05:00Is it possible that the substantial decline in Pas...Is it possible that the substantial decline in Pass YPA in the 1960s and 70s is due to a dramatic increase in the number of starting QBs? In 1959 there only 12 starting QBs. By 1978 there were 28 starting QBs. The main reason for this is the inclusion of 10 AFL teams plus a few more NFL expansion teams. As you add more teams the number of talented QBs does not automatically expand, so it just may be that many previous backups were suddenly thrust into starting positions.<br />A simple test would be to chart the Pass YPA for the top 12 QBs from 1959 to 1978 to see if this nullifies the downturn.Mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-65120114498894723062010-08-12T16:25:25.220-04:002010-08-12T16:25:25.220-04:00Yes they have “evened out” over the years because ...Yes they have “evened out” over the years because no coach has been silly enough to abandon the run in favor of the &quot;all pass play&quot; suggestions mentioned a few times above (Don Coryell comes to mind as someone who found this out the hard way, stats people always liked to mention how &quot;bad&quot; the Chargers’ Defenses were missing the simple point that the pass dominant offense used less time and kept the Chargers’ Defense on the field more thus fatiguing them and making them less effective.) I guess my response is fueled by this &quot;analysis of stats in a vacuum&quot; style thinking that permeates so many &quot;stats&quot; discussions and drives me crazy. The stats that &quot;even out&quot; due so because coaches &quot;in the know&quot; don&#39;t allow them to get out of hand by ignoring important real life factors like time and fatigue... If I&#39;m missing your point completely I apologize I haven&#39;t analyzed your Win Probability model yet so I don&#39;t know how much of this you&#39;ve factored in elsewhere...yugcigamehtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-84120284478721557172010-08-12T15:45:02.646-04:002010-08-12T15:45:02.646-04:00Yes. The clock, score, and other aspects of the si...Yes. The clock, score, and other aspects of the situation is considered in my Win Probability model. Unfortunately, there isn&#39;t digital play by play data available to apply the model before 2000. <br /><br />The clock and score certainly matter in any single situation, but over the course of an entire season or <i>many</i> seasons, those considerations even out. In other words, each season will feature roughly equivalent numbers of plays in various situations.Brian Burkehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-42419174449028265392010-08-12T15:43:30.008-04:002010-08-12T15:43:30.008-04:00One more comment, and I realize this seems too eth...One more comment, and I realize this seems too ethereal a thing to put into a stat analysis but there is the factor of fatigue. Pass Blocking and Run Blocking are two completely different tasks that demand different levels of energy from the player. Similarly Run Defense and Pass Rush do too. If running the ball fatigues your opponents more (the corollary benefit of consuming time is keeping the opponent&#39;s defense on the field longer) it will have a corresponding effect on 3rd and 4th quarter effectiveness. On paper Ali never beats Forman but by using the fatigue factor Ali defeats Forman easily... How can fatigue be factored into the analysis of run vs pass on a statistical level?? Any suggestions? (p.s. - many wide receivers rest on run plays, even though they should be blocking... and running backs catch their breath pass blocking too... though how you&#39;d factor this in is hard to say in a statistical world but in real football fatigue is a factor in how and why plays are chosen.)yugcigamehtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-73859031210514358402010-08-12T14:56:12.684-04:002010-08-12T14:56:12.684-04:00Someone finally mentioned the clock! Shouldn&#39;...Someone finally mentioned the clock! Shouldn&#39;t all this data be analyzed not just by how many points or yards runs or passes generate but how many points or yards they restrict from the opponents by consuming time!? It seems to me that that way a more balanced idea of the usefulness of Run vs Pass could be understood. Time is too important a factor to be left out of the equation as, unlike say Chess (my favorite game), it&#39;s not equal for both sides. Less time on the field = less chances to score and therefore less overall points generated. So a Run play would generate less over all points scored per attempt but more opponent&#39;s points restricted per play, or something like that... What do you think? (maybe you could find a mathematical expression of &quot;the overall time of possession divided by scoring drives per game&quot; and translate that into points restricted by running plays, or something, just thinking off the top of my head here...) Am I off base here!?Yugcigamehtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-77349718202238697502010-08-07T11:51:46.227-04:002010-08-07T11:51:46.227-04:00Yes. That is well understood, and that&#39;s what ...Yes. That is well understood, and that&#39;s what was meant by, &quot;Without detailed play-by-play data, we can&#39;t rely on advanced metrics like Expected Points Added (EPA). Instead, simple efficiency will have to do.&quot;<br /><br />Besides, those circumstances in which yardage is less important than time or other considerations will exist across all eras of the NFL.Brian Burkehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-40089047088043779542010-08-07T11:48:18.959-04:002010-08-07T11:48:18.959-04:00There is more to playcalling than simply maximizin...There is more to playcalling than simply maximizing the yards per play average. Running plays specifically are useful in running down the clock, reducing the risk of turnovers, wearing down the defense, etc. So it makes sense for coaches to call these plays in many circumstances, knowing full well that they are sacrificing yardage for some other benefit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-57179247949914243792010-06-16T15:38:47.411-04:002010-06-16T15:38:47.411-04:00I ran a few numbers on play calling tendencies and...I ran a few numbers on play calling tendencies and there are clear (and expected) patterns by quarter.<br /><br />The numbers below are from the 2007 play-by-play data. It show the percentage of the time that a pass play (P) follows a pass, a rush (R), a penalty (Pen), or some other play (O) (such as kickoff or punt). The data are sorted by team and time, so it includes the start of a new series compared to the end of the last series (rather than comparing it to the last play of the other team. This also means that the end of one quarter in one game will be be followed by the beginning of the same quart the next week -- but accounting for that was too much work at this point.) <br /><br />In a nutshell: <br />* Q1 &amp; Q3: teams definitely tend to alternate<br />* Q2: there is no clear pattern<br />* Q4: teams tend to repeat the same play type.<br /><br /><br />Q1<br />__________O_____P___Pen_____R<br />P______13.47__34.97__5.61__45.94<br />R______16.06__41.51__5.63__36.80<br /><br /><br />Q2<br />__________O_____P___Pen_____R<br />P______10.93__45.09__5.48__38.50<br />R______14.84__43.98__5.26__35.92<br /><br /><br /><br />Q3<br />__________O_____P___Pen_____R<br />P______12.79__38.52__5.40__43.30<br />R______15.79__43.11__4.63__36.48<br /><br /><br />Q4<br />__________O_____P___Pen_____R<br />P______10.92__52.20__5.58__31.30<br />R______11.42__37.81__4.76__46.01<br /><br /><br />Q5<br />__________O_____P___Pen_____R<br />P______14.29__36.51__4.76__44.44<br />R______13.13__26.26__4.04__56.57<br /><br /><br /><br />Obviously there is more analysis that could be done --- looking at the data by team, by score, by yards to go ....Tim Folkertsnoreply@blogger.com